Richard's blog

Did you smile today? Try to watch less TV? Sieze the moment? Then congratulations - you're a Virgin Atlantic in-flight activist. Welcome to the world of We Are What We Do.

This is the latest nonsense from weirdie beardie Richard Branson who's trying to persuade Virgin frequent fliers that if they "Join something" then they're halfway to saving the world. Virgin Atlantic has produced an in-flight magazine, with a list of 100 actions which will save the world. Most of them are pathetically inadequate ("Use a biro from start to finish"; "Show empathy"), but that's not the point: "Our big shtick at We Are What We do is that small actions that x lots of people = big change. We don't all have to do everything. But most of us doing something will change the world."

It just gets worse and worse for our nation's airlines. First Ryanair announce that they aren't making any money (boo hoo!), then Standard Life decide that investing in aviation is no longer ethical.

Standard Life Investments, which manages £588.5 million through its Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) range of funds, made the move after almost one-third of its customers who took part in an annual survey called for airline shares to be excluded. Scottish Widows already excludes airlines from its ethical-fund products, and it appears that more investment funds are likely to follow suit.

Could this be the latest excuse for not doing your homework? The Evening Standard has identified that if the third runway goes ahead, over 100,000 pupils will have their lessons interupted by the roar of jet engines.

Although schools closest to the runway will suffer from the loudest noise, schools in Kensington and Chelsea and Hammersmith and Fulham will also have regular overhead flights, at up to one every minute-and-a-half. Hardly a peaceful learning environment.

The schools affected are all listed in the Standard article, and include Oratory Roman Catholic Primary School, the feeder school for London Oratory (as formerly attended by the children of one ex-PM, Tony Blair). Would the runway be getting such government support if they were still going there?

What a contrast. While the British government spends billions of pounds widening motorways and tries to expand airports, the Spanish government has been investing in high-speed rail.

Spain is preparing itself for a future in which there may be limits on the number of flights a person is allowed to take, and has focused on the need to reduce domestic flights. The latest project focuses on journeys between Barcelona and Madrid; the solution is the 220mph Ave S103, a fancy train which carries 404 passengers on chairs which swivel so you're always facing forwards.

As part of the government's 'consultation', they've been hosting exhibitions around West London to explain the expansion. Their Westminster event was gate-crashed by Greenpeace, who denounced the consultation as an 'airfix'.

Residents in Richmond were polled as they left their exhibition - and the results are not what BAA want to hear. Only half of those questioned felt that they had been told what they needed to know about the expansion, with 49% of people still uncertain as to how they would be affected were the plans to increase flights to 700,000 per year given the go-ahead.

It's Sunday, and I'm feeling generous. So let's take a moment to consider the plight of BA boss-man Willie Walsh. British Airways used to be a national institution: the airline into whose arms we collapsed after a week of dealing with our inability to speak other languages. Now it's associated with losing your luggage, strikes, crash landings, lying about climate change and blackmailing pensioners.

Walsh's latest misguided scheme is to persuade local councils to support expansion. Local papers around the airport picked up a BA press release, which urged councils to back the third runway. The same councils which formed the 2M group to oppose expansion. The phrase "coals to Newcastle" springs to mind...

A Freedom of Information Act request from the Department for Transport reveals that six domestic flights were taken by DfT Ministers during the twelve months leading up to October 2007. Most of these flights leave from Glasgow International, an airport conveniently located in the constituency of one Tom Harris, Minister for Rail.

Now you or I might think that Mr. Harris would be better off by train, but who knows how a Minister's mind works? Perhaps he should spend less time jetting about on short-haul flights, and more time on the choo-choos he's meant to be in charge of...

On a lighter note, another FOI request shows that the least popular Minister at the DfT is Jim Fitzpatrick, Minister for the Environment and Aviation. He sent 150 Christmas cards this year, while his colleagues all sent 200 or more.

Sometimes you read an article which is truly shocking. This, dear readers, is one of them. British Airways has been sending leaflets to retired staff, claiming that their pensions are at risk if the third runway doesn't get the green light.

The leaflet urges former employees to write to Ruth Kelly in support of expansion, claiming that their pensions depend upon Heathrow's expansion. A quote in large print from Sigrid Mapp, chairman of the Liason council, which represents retired staff, says: "As pensioners, the security of our pensions depends directly on the longterm success of British Airways and that again depends on the success of Heathrow."

BA have already been rebuked by the Advertising Standards Agency for making false claims about the environmental impact of the third runway in a letter to frequent flyers. Frankly, making nonsense claims to the biggest polluters pales into insignificance compared with blackmailing elderly people who've devoted their lives for your company. If this is how low the aviation industry is sinking, then the forces of opposition must be doing something right...